Tag Archives: terrorism

It is ALWAYS okay to Punch a Nazi.

Note: [The majority of scholars identify Nazism in practice as a form of far-right politics.Far-right themes in Nazism include the argument that superior people have a right to dominate over other people and purge society of supposed inferior elements.]

In light of Richard Spencer (goon of the Alt right & self-proclaimed messiah of white power) being punched while on camera; a debate has began to form around whether or not it’s permissible to use violence against Far right members? Well, the answer is simple, yes, it is always okay to punch a Nazi.

spencer3

Fascism and racism embodies violence; it secures itself ideologically & politically through threat of violent acts & violent beliefs. Parasites like Richard Spencer are not here to present discourse, they are calling people to take up arms for their cause. He buys into the reactionary, liberal left, knowing full well that they will give him the platform to shout his poisonous rallying cry. Scum like the “Alt-right” are nothing new. Fascists have been putting on suits & ties for decades in an attempt to normalise their tribalistic bullshit.

The National Front did the same thing throughout Europe in an attempt to legitimise themselves, as did those laughing stocks of Right wing Britain, Paul Golding & Tommy Robinson whose group of slobbering idiots ‘Britain First’ & the ‘EDL’ both attempted to enter the mainstream. Do you know what these groups have in common, despite their sickening ideologies? They were all dismantled by a violent visceral opposition of Antifa activists. These groups were met by huge counter demos that often broke out into conflicts & fights on the streets, resulting in property damage and injuries on both sides. Not only were these fringe groups physically wounded, but their morale was often broken too, by constantly having their demos dwarfed in size by the opposition that turned up to confront them. Not only this, but the state could not handle the pressure of such groups. It was costing local councils thousands and exhausting local police forces who could no longer guarantee people’s safety. It was this escalation of risk caused by violent direct action that suppressed these far-right groups & inevitably pushed them back into the fringe. Although the ideology still exists & once again the far-right is on the increase in Europe; it was violent protests, not liberal debate that destroyed the material threat from our streets & protected targeted communities from the far-right menace.

The liberal stance of trying to ‘understand fascists’ & give them a right to “free speech” is an historically flawed concept if one recalls the ironic slogan of German liberals before the Nazis took over: ‘We are so liberal that we even grant the freedom to destroy liberty’, and it was made very clear what Goebbels intentions were, when he stated: ‘We have come to the Reichstag in order to destroy it. If democracy is stupid enough to reward us for doing this, this is the problem of democracy.’

By offering Fascists platforms, you legitimise their point; by knocking their teeth out, you force their subjects to be taboo from society. If you attempt rational debate, you allow these cretins to swindle & manipulate their rhetoric & policy. We can see contemporary examples of this in the far-right parties of England, Hungary & France who have been able to do this very thing. Parties like UKIP, Jobbik & Le Pen have gained traction over the years, and increased in popularity amongst the right wing, to the point where they have been able to push policy & frame debates within their own political territories. This has resulted in a spike in hate crimes within the UK & has spread an anti-immigrant sentiment across European borders resulting in death and violence against marginalised communities as well as the abandonment of humanitarian help.

This moralist stance that we must rely solely on pacifism to prove our points is juvenile & ahistorical. Such pure notions do not deserve to be recognised as legitimate opposition or tactics to deal with Fascism. Anti-fascism can be both defensive & proactive. If Richard Spencer wore all black & spoke Arabic, the liberal press would not be debating whether or not it is okay to use violence against him, it would be cheering his defeat. You cannot live complacent in violent societies while simultaneously condemning violence against a system (or body) that perpetuates it. These are pundits who have praised Obama despite the mass civilian casualties which are a result of his drone program. These same people who call foul & give liberal sob stories over Spencer being punched, cheered when Saddam Hussein was hung. Unlike the contradictory take on violence liberals give, Anarchist and Anti-fascist militants do not use violence to reinforce themselves as a dominant ideology, but rather as theatre that co-exists with its theory. Anarchists & socialists are fully aware that punching Nazis one by one does not tackle the root issue of far-right ideologies. It fully recognises that it must rely on political organisation and propaganda as well as its physical resistance. The violent political dissidents of the militant left is as much of a performance as it is practical. A reminder to both the status quo, and the encroaching threats to people’s liberty, that people in large groups still hold real power over the systems & contracts that bind us to obedience.

This is not to say that we should enjoy violence; far from it. “militant anti-fascist violence is an unpleasant method to achieve a greater political goal. It is not fetishized the way that fascism fetishizes violence, and it would be much more preferable to rely on passive resistance; but we cannot guarantee that what Trotsky referred to as ‘flabby pacifism’ will effectively inhibit fascist encroachment. Fascism views passivity as weakness, not as a political strategy; it will crush peaceful protests and the will to resist, and their violence must be met head on.” (Militant Anti-Fascism: 100 Years Of Resistance by M.Tesa). Rather we should see it for what it really is a violent movement in a more violent world.

destory-fac

 

 

 

A response to the Ankara shooter:

19 Dec 2016 Russian ambassador Andrey Karlov is assassinated  

The consequences of war are never contained within the borders of said conflict. The attacker shouted “We die in Aleppo, you die here” this is not a terrorist, this is desperate man driven to insanity and unstable violent behaviour. A bloody reminder that actions have consequences rather than an intent to spread terror.

Moralists will reject the attack in Ankara calling it radicalisation. This is all to often spouted from pedestals of privilege. Deep down underneath the dominant ideology and the social constructs we have created, we are all Radicals. I hold no quarrel, nor shed tears for dead politicians what worries me is the consequences that were unforeseen to the shooter. Russia and “tough guy Putin” will retaliate hard & it will not be the shooter who receives these repercussions in which ideally he should. If you are to commit acts of violence and propaganda by the deed against violent states & their agents ensure you create an environment that you alone are to blame.

New-wave Fundamentalism and its demons

In the last couple of days we have witnessed two major terror attacks which have shaken social media and were widely reported on by media outlets across the board. One in Beirut, where we witnessed the capital’s most lethal bombing since the end of the Lebanese civil war in 1990 and where an estimated 44 were killed in two separate explosions. The first concealed in a parked motor bike and the second being a suicide bomber. The explosives were detonated in a predominately Shia suburb south of the capital. As well as killing over 40, the bombs injured hundreds putting emergency facilities on high alert and who had to put out a call to residents to donate blood. More than 200 people were wounded – many of them seriously, Health Minister Wael Abou Faour said when speaking to the BBC. These attacks rocked the country reigniting age old tensions between the various communities that cohabitant the region. Beirut was targeted due to there being a Hezbollah stronghold in the region, a controversial unit currently opposing ISIS and fighting them through out the middle east. Hezbollah vowed to continue its fight against “terrorists”, warning of a “long war” against its enemies.
The second attack came in Paris and happened between the late hours of November the 13th and now (14th) with attackers claiming the lives of 127 victims. It is still unclear and currently being reported on as I write but, what I can piece together is several gun men stormed Paris and took several hostages as well as opening fire into crowds. Reporters on the ground claimed they could see bodies in the streets and were unable to confirm whether they were dead or wounded. It was too dangerous for reporters to get any closer making reports slightly scattered and incoherent. From my understanding gun men held 100 music fans hostage in the Bataclan concert venue, 50 boulevard Voltaire in the 11th district. As police arrived on scene and began to approach, explosions could be heard, some outlets claiming attackers throw explosives at the hostages within the building. It should come to no surprise who the group claiming to be behind the attacks is. Yes, you guessed it, ISIS/ISIL (Islamic State), the death cult currently rampaging throughout the middle east and today’s bogeyman for the western world to fight. Saying this, the outlets I had been following when writing, could not independently confirm this. However, with a little bit of research, what we do know is that ISIS supporters and possible members (as we know their soldiers use media for online promotion and social engineering), took to twitter praising the attacks under the # ParisIsBurning (some refered to these men as ‘lone wolves’ suggesting this may of not be a commanded attack). This attack comes straight after western politicians were celebrating the death of Emwazi Muhammad (“jihadi John”) a former UK citizen turned extremist who left to join ISIS in 2013. This odd ceremony of rejoicing in the death of a young man (despite his crimes), seemed very much as a quick fix, knee jerk response to reinforce the ideology that we have moral superiority over “The Savages”. The irony being that it is this same self righteous neo-liberal delusion that created the very thing we are praising the destruction of.
Stating the obvious, these attacks were senseless, barbaric and inhuman but, I think it is important that we remember that these tragic events are a clear symptom of the masquerade that is ‘The War on Terror’ and our NATO actions within the middle east. Our current military actions abroad are directly linked to this new wave of fundamentalism. British media report that the attackers in the Paris had shouted “it’s for Syria”, before murdering the people within the music hall. Syria is currently being torn apart, not only by a bloody civil war between its brutal regime and various factions but, by our NATO allies US and Russia, who have been fighting over the land and bombing the nation in a pseudo-proxy war backed by a western coalition of military power. It is the constant destabilization that western powers insist on instilling that is breeding such creatures like ISIS. Yet, which is equally damaging is our justification and mantra that accompany our war-mongering in Islamic countries. I’m sure we will have plenty of political leaders who will come out and have various scripted speeches on the horrors of this event, but few who will address the neo-colonial ideals that led us here. It is this very denial & western exceptionalism, that has given birth to the misapprehension that our instigation of war surpasses ethical or moral judgement. Believing our conflicts are right and justified only reinforces the anti-muslim/Arab rhetoric that has been stemming out Europe since the early 2000’s. This stigma attached to Muslim and Islam itself is born out of ignorance and engrained fear of the “other”. I could poetically put it that terrorism has no religion however, I don think this justifies my point. Most of those killed by ISIS and most of those fighting ISIS are Muslims. Lebanon is 54% Muslim and 8 million Muslims live in France, each one a citizen. 
“Everyone’s worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there’s really an easy way, stop participating in it” – Noam Chomsky